Women & Discrimination

Whoh!

what's all this?

No's 1 and 2 - This is historical nonsense from primitive times (most other mammals are still in the 'primitive' stage - we are trying to climb out of it!).

No. 3 - the neurons are 'in' the grey matter, you are talking 'apples, and oranges'!

No 4. - the nucleus is the core of a cell, and is unrelated to the size of the hypothalamus (which is, as you say, larger in men, and is thought to be the centre of the old reptilian ancestral brain which worked almost entirely on instinct, without the benefit of 'thought'!).

No 5. - larger than what?... each other, or mens, either of which is nonsense, as they can't be bigger than each other; one must exceed the other; or they can't be bigger than the male, simply because the male brain is larger, in general!

Please!

work in the field of 'brain research' brings to mind a famous Canadian Musical Ikon: Joni Mitchel, and her song "Both Sides Now"!
You can read whatever you like in the field, just by carefully selecting your titles.

Civilization, however, is about conscious change; realizing what archaic forces are acting on us, simply because we no longer have the benefit of 'evolution' changing these patterns to suit the new world, because there is nowhere near the time available for that horribly inefficient system to function, and deciding to ignore, or 'rise above' the hormones, and instincts of the past, in order to create a society which allows all the same benefits and support, without deference to unimportant biological constraints.

Mr. or Ms, BoWoGo:

You ask- What is this?

I will tell you.


l. All cultures divide theirlabor by sex. There is no culture which does not give more control of the public and political world to men and more responsiblity for child rearing to women. If you know of one, please inform me.

2. Many of the psychological differences between the sexes are exactly what an evolutionary biologist who knew only their physical differences would predict. It is clear that the average male is larger than the average female. This bespeaks an evolutionary history of greater violent competition by males over mating opportunities. Other physical traits of men, such as later puberty, greater adult strength, and shorter lives, also indicate a history of selection for high-stakes competition.

3. Doreen Kimura from MIT in her 1999 book- Sex and Cognition, has written that Men have larger brains with more neurons ( even correcting for body size) though women have a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of grey matter.

4. Again--Kimura--The interstitial nuclei in the anterior hypothalamus, and a nucleus of the stria terminalis, also in the hypothalamus are LARGER IN MEN; they have been implicated in sexual behavior and aggressiveness.

5. Again--Kimura--Portions of the cerebral commissures, which link the left and right brain, appear to be larger in women, and thier brains may function in a less lopsided manner than men's.


I think it is clear that Learning and socialization can affect the functioning of the human brain, of course, but probably not the size of its visible anatomic structures.

The theory that boys and girls are born identical except for their genitalia, with all other differences coming from the way society treats them. One has only to look at the what has happened when attempts have been made to separate biology from socialization. If gender is socially constructed, a child who is a male and receives a sex change operation, should have the mind of a normal girl. If gender depends on prenatal hormones, the child should feel like a boy trapped in a girl's body.
Studies have been done with regard to children who were born without a penis and then were castrated and raised as girls. All of them showed male patterns of rough and tumble play and had typically male attitudes and interests. More than half of them spontaneously declared that they were boys.

well mporter; that's a big improvement over your previous version of the 'scientific' aspect.

and, as for the:

"I think it is clear that Learning and socialization can affect the functioning of the human brain, of course, but probably not the size of its visible anatomic structures."

We agree with the exception of the fact that any organ or muscle will enlarge somewhat upon extensive usage.

And the final 'socialized' animal, be it male or female, is the product of its entire environment, and its genetic makeup, combined.

Oh, of course, BOWOGO. You are quite correct. In fact, your statement should be written in Stone.

I am not being satirical. I mean it.

Your statement-THE FINAL SOCIALIZED ANIMAL, BE IT MALE OR FEMALE, IS THE PRODUCT OF ITS ENTIRE ENVIRONMENT, AND ITS GENETIC MAKEUP COMBINED.

If I may-

The final socialized animal, be it male or female, is the product of its genetic makeup and its entire environment combined.

It is clear that both Genetic Factors and the Enviroment( Environment, of course, includes pre-natal enviroment in the womb) come together and influence each other.

You are probably familiar with the FranzBoaz/Margaret Mead school which attempted to maintain that peoples differ only because their cultures differ. Evolutionary Psychology has disproven that statement.

However, it is necessary to point out that in some cases an extreme environmentalist explanation is correct- eg- differences among races and ethnic groups in test scores

In some instances,such as certain inherited neurological disorders, an extreme hereditarian explanation is correct.

With the completion of the Human Genome Project, we may find that we will gain a much richer understanding of the genetic roots of human behavior.

and i might add; our job is to do our best to nullify the negative effects of both genetic flaws, and imbedded innate behaviour which is no longer appropriate, while, at the same time modifying the environment to the degree possible to enhance and enrich the growing experience.

Genetic Flaws?

Do you mean flaws like Tay-Sachs disease?

certainly.

Do you mean flaws( sic) like homosexuality?

I think there may be some who would call homosexuality a flaw. Others would not.

Are you saying that government should change the basic nature of man as found in his genes?

To conform to what standards?

I think not.

by genetic flaws, i mean 'flaws'.
those transferred genes that (like Tay-Sachs) by their nature interfere with the health, or potential of an individual, restricting their ability to participate fully within their chosen society.

All the chosen governors of a society should be mandated to do is to provide for as high a rate of freedom from restriction as is possible for all of its members, making none of those choices for them.

The phrase "freedom from restriction" sounds good.

What does it mean?

I know, but i have been 'restricted' from saying.

You see, BoWoGo, that's what happens when you let someone tinker with your Genes!!!!

just you keep your hands out of my jeans!!

BoWoGo-

I'm married. I would never touch your Jeans. But I wouldn't mind talking about your Genes.